# Scaling Evaluation-time Compute with Reasoning Models as Evaluators

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.19877 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19877/

## Key facts

- Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 34 of its 76 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Mar 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Test-time compute and efficient thinking](https://mlsanity.com/lr/test-time-compute-and-efficient-thinking/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 34)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [s1: Simple test-time scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19393/) (2025)
- [OpenAI o1 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16720/) (2024)
- [DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.14196/) (2024)
- [Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12122/) (2024)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04475/) (2024)
- [Process Reinforcement through Implicit Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01456/) (2025)
- [RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13787/) (2024)
- [Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.01535/) (2024)
- [The Lessons of Developing Process Reward Models in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.07301/) (2025)
- [L1: Controlling How Long A Reasoning Model Thinks With Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04697/) (2025)
- [Cognitive Behaviors that Enable Self-Improving Reasoners, or, Four Habits of Highly Effective STaRs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.01307/) (2025)
- [Skywork-Reward: Bag of Tricks for Reward Modeling in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.18451/) (2024)
- [Towards Large Reasoning Models: A Survey of Reinforced Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.09686/) (2025)
- [ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/) (2024)
- [RLHF Workflow: From Reward Modeling to Online RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.07863/) (2024)
- [PRMBench: A Fine-grained and Challenging Benchmark for Process-Level Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.03124/) (2025)
- [The BiGGen Bench: A Principled Benchmark for Fine-grained Evaluation of Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05761/) (2024)
- [A Chain-of-Thought Is as Strong as Its Weakest Link: A Benchmark for Verifiers of Reasoning Chains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00559/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Step-by-step Reasoning Traces: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12289/) (2025)
- [MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.17080/) (2023)
- [The Alignment Ceiling: Objective Mismatch in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.00168/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Inference-Time Scaling for Generalist Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.02495/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Process Reward Models: From Outcome Signals to Process Supervisions for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.08049/) (2025)
- [JEV-as-a-Judge: Accept When Confident, Escalate When Unsure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26550/) (2026)
- [Generative AI Act II: Test Time Scaling Drives Cognition Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13828/) (2025)
- [InT: Self-Proposed Interventions Enable Credit Assignment in LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.14209/) (2026)
- [Examining Reasoning LLMs-as-Judges in Non-Verifiable LLM Post-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.12246/) (2026)
- [ReasoningFlow: Semantic Structure of Complex Reasoning Traces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02532/) (2025)
- [Enhancing Large Language Model Reasoning with Reward Models: An Analytical Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.01925/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Legal Reasoning Traces with Legal Issue Tree Rubrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.01020/) (2025)
- [ReasoningFlow: Discourse Structures for Understanding LLM Reasoning Traces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.05402/) (2026)
- [Reasoning over mathematical objects: on-policy reward modeling and test time aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.18886/) (2026)
- [Agent Step Value: Auditing Evaluation-Channel Sensitivity in Black-Box Agent Traces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.04419/) (2026)
- [CoBa: Cost-Effective Test-Time Scaling via Compute-Balanced Routing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.07424/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As language model (LM) outputs get more and more natural, it is becoming more difficult than ever to evaluate their quality. Simultaneously, increasing LMs' "thinking" time through scaling test-time compute has proven an effective technique to solve challenging problems in domains such as math and code. This raises a natural question: can an LM's evaluation capability also be improved by spending more test-time compute? To answer this, we investigate employing reasoning models-LMs that natively generate long chain-of-thought reasoning-as evaluators. Specifically, we examine methods to leverage more test-time compute by (1) using reasoning models, and (2) prompting these models to evaluate not only the response as a whole (i.e., outcome evaluation) but also assess each step in the response separately (i.e., process evaluation). In experiments, we observe that the evaluator's performance improves monotonically when generating more reasoning tokens, similar to the trends observed in LM-based generation. Furthermore, we use these more accurate evaluators to rerank multiple generations, and demonstrate that spending more compute at evaluation time can be as effective as using more compute at generation time in improving an LM's problem-solving capability.